“I don’t understand…” The Korean Volleyball Federation (KOVO) publishes a yearbook after each season schedule. It is to record a season by summarizing it.
It also organizes statistics on various matters related to league matches. Set aside time for a ‘review’. However, in the 2022-23 season Dodram V-League, it seems necessary to prepare a separate section on referee decisions.
This is because controversies, objections and dissatisfaction related to game judgment and video reading have been particularly frequent this season. In the 4th round match between Hyundai Capital and Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance held at Yu Gwan-sun Gymnasium in Cheonan on the 15th, the game was temporarily suspended due to the judging process.
With Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance leading 18-17 in the 4th set, both teams conducted a long rally rarely seen in the men’s division. The rally ended as Shin Shin-ho of Samsung Fire Insurance tried to spike the ball out of line.
Referee Choi Seong-kwon, who served as the chief referee, sent a touchout signal for the ball hit by Shin Shin-ho. With Samsung Fire’s score, the number on the scoreboard changed to 19-17 and the rally ended. Then, Hyundai Capital players protested against referee Choi. Even on the Hyundai Capital bench, he gestured that the ball did not touch the blocker. It was the claim that he was not a touchout.
Referee Choi accepted the protest and requested a self-review of the referee’s video. As a result of the video review, it was confirmed that the ball spiked by Shin Shin-ho was out of line without hitting the Hyundai Capital blocker’s hand. Hyundai Capital scored a goal, and the numbers on the display board were readjusted, resulting in a tie of 18-18.
Then Samsung Fire & Marine Manager Kim Sang-woo protested against referees Choi Jae-hyo and Choi Seong-kwon, who served as assistant referees that day. There was no greater commotion or protest intensity. Due to the long delay, the warning did not even come out. After coach Kim protested, the match was resumed. Hyundai Capital took the fourth set 25-22 and beat Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance with a set score of 3-1.카지노사이트
Coach Kim protested again to the referee and assistant referee after the match. He explained the situation at the meeting with reporters who visited the site after the Hyundai Capital match.
Coach Kim said, “After the decision signal, when the opposing players protested, I accepted it and read the video, but I don’t understand this part.” He added, “It is said that it was a referee’s mistake, but our players change their joys and sorrows one by one. But I don’t know why I can only judge like that.”
The video review at the discretion of the referee is a ‘self video review’, which can only be requested by the referee of the game. Usually it is requested before making a decision (before making a signal). However, after making the first decision, referee Choi requested a self-video review after receiving protests from the players. Director Kim saw that there was a problem in this part. This is because it can be seen as an overturn of judgment.
Unfortunately, in the 4th set at the time, Hyundai Capital did not have a chance to request a video review. This is because it has already been used once at the beginning of the set. There was another regrettable part from the perspective of director Kim and Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance. The rally was long enough for the ball to come and go 6 times with the net in between. If you look at only the 4th set, you can see that this is the point of victory.
However, in this process, there is a scene in which director Kim and Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance made a problem. It is claimed that Hyundai Capital middle blocker Song Won-geun committed a catch ball foul while handling a ball close to the net, and the referee missed this point.
The rally is over and the game is over, so the result will not change. However, as with most ball games, volleyball is also a very important game. For Samsung Fire & Marine, the flow was cut off at this time, and the decision process became a direct cause.
Regarding video reading, KOVO has prepared a guideline on the 9th. KOVO changed the standard to ‘correction is possible immediately if there is an error (misread) when reading the video’.
Last month (December) on the 27th (KB Insurance-Korea Electric Power Corporation), the next day, the 28th (Hyundai Capital-OK Financial Group), and the 7th (Korean Air-Hyundai Capital), as controversy over video reading continued, KOVO took emergency measures A meeting was held to change the standards. This standard does not apply to referee decisions. Applies only to video reading situations.
One of the words that came out during the team review held after the 2nd round was not to overturn the decision after the referee’s decision. This means that the referee should not do a self-video review after making the first decision. However, referee Choi did not do that in the game on the 15th.
The referee’s self-video review differs from the video review requested by the team (head coach, coach, player). that’s how many times
Team video review is only requested once per set. If the video reading is misread and the judgment is changed or the judgment is not possible, one more opportunity is given. However, there is no standard for limiting the number of times for the referee’s self-video reading.